Missed connection

[baiskeli]

This is my version of a “missed connection” post…

You: headphones, no helmet passing me on the right in the bike lane on Clarendon Blvd. the morning of May 9 about 8 am.

Me: riding safely as usual

You should call your damn passes – especially when passing on the right. I could have swerved right into you.

Dumbass.

Topic

[NicDiesel]

@Hancockbs 63011 wrote:

There are many problems with using data for selective enforcement, not the least of which is that the data can be interpreted in many ways.

Or that it was collected in a biased fashion…

[Terpfan]

I read so many complaints in the comments section of some news websites from pedestrians about cyclists cut them off. This morning at not one, not two, but three different lights I had pedestrians cutting me off to jaywalk. I’m going to start counting the number jaywalking versus the number of fellow cyclists I observe runnign the red versus bad motorists. I’m willing to bet we show up on the bottom of that count.

[dbb]

@Terpfan 63015 wrote:

I read so many complaints in the comments section of some news websites from pedestrians about cyclists cut them off. This morning at not one, not two, but three different lights I had pedestrians cutting me off to jaywalk. I’m going to start counting the number jaywalking versus the number of fellow cyclists I observe runnign the red versus bad motorists. I’m willing to bet we show up on the bottom of that count.

Pennsylvania Ave was rich this morning with peds in crosswalks against the light, taking refuge in the cycletrack and one or two using the cycletrack as a centerlane sidewalk. Forced me to focus on something other than police doing U-turns:)

[dasgeh]

@dbb 63020 wrote:

Pennsylvania Ave was rich this morning with peds in crosswalks against the light, taking refuge in the cycletrack and one or two using the cycletrack as a centerlane sidewalk. Forced me to focus on something other than police doing U-turns:)

Yesterday, I ran into a friend who was jaywalking into the PA cycletrack. She was taking refuge behind the signal post. As I rode up in the cycletrack, she peaked out to see if it was clear to continue jaywalking. I pulled behind the sign with her to chat. It was a very pleasant encounter.

She did mention that some cyclists yell at her when she’s waiting behind the post. I know it’s probably not y’all, but please don’t. She’s behind a post, not in the cycletrack. She may have jaywalked to get there, but I’m sure she did so safely (i.e. after looking for cars and cyclists).

[dasgeh]

@mstone 62999 wrote:

So, since you won’t get everyone on a bike to always behave well (any more than any non-zero set of people will always behave well), will you just admit failure? Or, is there some more practical approach? Because if that’s your going-in position, it’s over. Changing the conversation is hard, but at least it’s a path to something viable.

Honestly, I think there’s a difference here between how you behave, and how you judge others’ behavior. Personally, I don’t run reds. Ever.

But when I see others run reds, I try not to judge. They may be on their way to perform heart surgery. They may know the light and route and judge it safer to run the light than not. They may have gotten really bad news and are rushing home to deal with it. They may have gotten an email from their boss demanding that they GET TO WORK RIGHT NOW. I don’t know. I’m sure not everyone has an excuse, and even if they have an excuse, it’s just that. Still, it’s not mine to judge.

What is mine to judge is whether the police department sets up a sting to ticket those cyclists that do run reds. I judge that to be a waste of police resources, which would be better put to enforcing laws that keep others safe.

[jrenaut]

@dasgeh 63022 wrote:

She did mention that some cyclists yell at her when she’s waiting behind the post.

That’s just dumb. There is clearly a pedestrian island there. Pedestrians can stand on the pedestrian island. The real fault here, aside from cyclists being jerks, is DDOT for leaving pedestrian islands in the cycletrack. Also the pedestrians who are so completely oblivious that they remain in the bike lane despite the approach of bell-ringing cyclists. For a while I tried waving them in towards the center, where your friend was waiting, but no one seemed to understand that so I gave up. Now I just ring my bell. More often than not the pedestrian will move the wrong way, which seems insane to me, but whatever.

[dasgeh]

@jrenaut 63026 wrote:

That’s just dumb. There is clearly a pedestrian island there. Pedestrians can stand on the pedestrian island. The real fault here, aside from cyclists being jerks, is DDOT for leaving pedestrian islands in the cycletrack. Also the pedestrians who are so completely oblivious that they remain in the bike lane despite the approach of bell-ringing cyclists. For a while I tried waving them in towards the center, where your friend was waiting, but no one seemed to understand that so I gave up. Now I just ring my bell. More often than not the pedestrian will move the wrong way, which seems insane to me, but whatever.

No, there was no island. The paint created an “island” behind the post, but there was nothing raised. That’s why I could just pull my bike into it. Neither of us was in the cycletrack. And not that you asked, but this was at the Reagan/Clinton buildings west of 13th.

Unfortunately, PA is just too wide not to have a pedestrian refuge. I’ve been caught in the middle of that road without jaywalking. I do think signs or paint showing where peds should be would be helpful.

[jabberwocky]

@jrenaut 63007 wrote:

My impression is that VA is super harsh on speeding, but only where it’s convenient to enforce, like 66. Making sure it’s safe in front of every school in the county sounds like real work.

Virginia is harsh on speeding as revenue generation. As with most traffic enforcement, “safety” is how they justify it, but for the most part they just want to write lots of tickets to make lots of money.

They aren’t interested in smaller roads because they don’t have as much traffic volume. They won’t write as many expensive tickets in an hour enforcing the speed limits around schools as they will on the interstates. Its purely cost-benefit. If people squeal enough, they’ll do a highly visible enforcement drive for a day or two, but move right back to writing expensive tickets on the highways as soon as possible.

[jrenaut]

Oh, one of the intersections without the bricks in the cycletrack.

I agree that PA needs pedestrian refuge. What it does not need is bricks that clearly are meant to be that refuge but are now directly in the cycletrack.

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 63023 wrote:

Honestly, I think there’s a difference here between how you behave, and how you judge others’ behavior. Personally, I don’t run reds. Ever.

But when I see others run reds, I try not to judge. They may be on their way to perform heart surgery. They may know the light and route and judge it safer to run the light than not. They may have gotten really bad news and are rushing home to deal with it. They may have gotten an email from their boss demanding that they GET TO WORK RIGHT NOW. I don’t know. I’m sure not everyone has an excuse, and even if they have an excuse, it’s just that. Still, it’s not mine to judge.

What is mine to judge is whether the police department sets up a sting to ticket those cyclists that do run reds. I judge that to be a waste of police resources, which would be better put to enforcing laws that keep others safe.

This. There are only a few situations at this point where I would proceed through a red (eg a sensor controlled one that doesn’t change, but IIUC thats legal if I wait long enough) but based on all I’ve read about the advantages and disadvantages, the safety implications, etc I have a hard time judging someone who stops at a red, and then proceeds through it safely (judging someone who proceeds through without slowing, in a dangerous fashion, is something else). I am sympathetic to the notion of improving the optics to alter the political situation – but there are many ways to do that – lobbying, donating money to bike advocacy, explaining the bike POV to your neighbors etc. Some of us will choose to forego some time savings to do so. Others beleive that in certain instances proceeding through a red is to their safety advantage, and others do not think the optics effect is worth the cost in their time. As a cycling advocate, I respect their right to choose what to give up for the sake of optics.

[83b]

@jrenaut 63026 wrote:

The real fault here, aside from cyclists being jerks, is DDOT for leaving pedestrian islands in the cycletrack. Also the pedestrians who are so completely oblivious that they remain in the bike lane despite the approach of bell-ringing cyclists.

I’m afraid I disagree about cyclists automatically being jerks just because they yell. I’ve had to bellow a sharp “Oi!” at more than a few pedestrians who were blithely jaywalking directly into my path on Penn. See e.g. this Missed Connection from a few weeks ago or this camera crew setting up a shoot in the bike lane. I don’t have any particular regrets about having exchanged harsh words with them.

[DismalScientist]

The problem with “benign” cyclists running red after stopping and seeing that all traffic is clear and then proceeding across is that it would be perfectly safe for an automobile driver to do the same thing. (I’m not talking about signals not detecting cyclist here.) Defending this behavior by cyclists and not automobile drivers is basically saying the cyclists should have special rights. I don’t think this is a good way of establishing comity between road users.

[mstone]

@jabberwocky 63028 wrote:

If people squeal enough, they’ll do a highly visible enforcement drive for a day or two, but move right back to writing expensive tickets on the highways as soon as possible.

Which is all a good rant, except you’re talking about two different jurisdictions; the state police writing tickets on the interstates aren’t the same ACPD or FCPD writing tickets in front of the school. There is a level of effort argument (easier to just go back to the same spot than find a new one in a different neighborhood each day) but that’s a matter of top level priorities. I don’t believe it’s a revenue issue; the police really don’t care much, and they’d still be able to write plenty of tickets. Cops generally really hate writing tickets, and will usually try to get some done as quickly as possible in the absence of any incentive to prioritize one spot over another.

[DismalScientist]

@jrenaut 63029 wrote:

Oh, one of the intersections without the bricks in the cycletrack.

I agree that PA needs pedestrian refuge. What it does not need is bricks that clearly are meant to be that refuge but are now directly in the cycletrack.

Maybe if the cycletrack wasn’t put down the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue, but instead bike lanes where put on the right side of the road, this wouldn’t be an issue.:rolleyes: Pedestrian jaywalked Pennsylvania before the cycletrack and rightly took whatever refuge they could in the median.

[dasgeh]

@DismalScientist 63032 wrote:

The problem with “benign” cyclists running red after stopping and seeing that all traffic is clear and then proceeding across is that it would be perfectly safe for an automobile driver to do the same thing. (I’m not talking about signals not detecting cyclist here.) Defending this behavior by cyclists and not automobile drivers is basically saying the cyclists should have special rights. I don’t think this is a good way of establishing comity between road users.

I don’t disagree. The way I advocate stopping for all reds is this: I rely on those red lights to keep drivers, in their multi-ton steel boxes, from running over me when I have the green. I rely on drivers to respect those lights. I should respect them as well.

[Author]

Replies